Colt
Well-Known Member
That citizens fear brutish, violent men is a natural reaction. Now the behavior is being justified and tolerated by soft on crime (D)'s all over America.So, discrimination has no effect?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That citizens fear brutish, violent men is a natural reaction. Now the behavior is being justified and tolerated by soft on crime (D)'s all over America.So, discrimination has no effect?
I would say that there is no one single BLM platform. There are and were all sorts of BLM beliefs. Some of them very violent. Those on the right are correct that the narrative against the police was largely false. Not always, but largely. There are some clear abuses, but black people are often more likely to be one the receiving end of attention from the police because their economic situation makes them more likely to be both offenders and victims. And then there is the perceived "us against them" mentality of both sides.Did you ever stop and think that some people may have joined the protest for ulterior motives, such as what we also saw in the 60's and 70's during the anti-war protests?
BLM does not teach that violence should be used, although one of the founding members did try and justify its use.
Yes, and both the FBI and CIA have been problematic since the beginning of them (shortly after WWII). CIA is responsible for interfering in the affairs of other nations -- without permission from the US public or our knowledge. FBI was spying on senators from the beginning.There is no question that Trump is a caustic person who should never be in the WH again! But some of those wild claims that the Leftist media dismissed early on turned out to be true. There was an FBI lawyer convicted of altering documents between the CIA and FBI! FISA court abuse is now widely documented! There was bugging of Trump towers in an attempt to damage Trump. (R)'s get about 4% of the vote in Washington DC and (D)'s dominate the bedroom communities around Washington. The Fed-gov IS a (D) dominated institution.
Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?Yes, and both the FBI and CIA have been problematic since the beginning of them (shortly after WWII). CIA is responsible for interfering in the affairs of other nations -- without permission from the US public or our knowledge. FBI was spying on senators from the beginning.
You noticed the weaponization of the FBI as well against political opponents of the left wing. How many times has raids been used on Republicans thus far?
The Left has been using intimidation and violence to advance their agenda for years in America. What's scary is that the Right has finally had enough and is willing to do the same. And don't forget, the left attempted to unseat an elected president with a fake Russian collusion conspiracy based on a spurious dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign. They've done everything they could to get Trump out of the way, this is just more of the same by a corrupt FBI.
And there were consequences for that. If Trump did the same then he will probably not be able to run again since one of the punishments for the crime of a President illegally removing documents from the White House is an inability to run for President again.Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
It's a fair enough statement. However Democrats have a poor track record for finding any evidence, assuming said evidence even exists.Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI
The FBI investigating political figures will always have partisan pushback.
I will be curious about what is found and how this plays out. I am no fan of Trump, so am biased in this regard. But if evidence is found, evidence is found.
What makes you say that? They found more than enough evidence to impeach and convict Trump in his first impeachment. That is why the Republicans that were in charge of the trial part did not allow the presentation of any evidence at all against Trump.It's a fair enough statement. However Democrats have a poor track record for finding any evidence, assuming said evidence even exists.
Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.And there were consequences for that. If Trump did the same then he will probably not be able to run again since one of the punishments for the crime of a President illegally removing documents from the White House is an inability to run for President again.
If "soft on crime" means to act fairly towards all, then I'm on board. There should be no doubt whatsoever that justice is NOT blind when it comes to how minorities have been treated by our judicial system.That citizens fear brutish, violent men is a natural reaction. Now the behavior is being justified and tolerated by soft on crime (D)'s all over America.
I'm glad you clarified this in the last sentence above.Those on the right are correct that the narrative against the police was largely false. Not always, but largely.
So well said, imo.The police situation is largely a mess because cities got to cheap and sent out hammers to deal with all of their social problems. The weaponization of police occurred largely because it was a way to save money. Well guess what? Weaponization only solves problems in one way. And it is not a good one. A mental health expert would be nice for many problems with police backup on hand would be ideal for many problems that the police face. But that is going to make policing much more expensive.
I hope your prediction is wrong, but...What I think will happen is that the populace as a whole will get tired of n excessively high crime rate and we will be back to business as usual.. Perhaps even made slightly worse when it comes to violence due to the underfunding of police departments and the continued policy of using hammers to solve all problems.
I was not a "fake dossier" as it has been misrepresented continuously by the right.Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.
I just looked it up. The washington post still has an article about him being fined in 2005. He was trying to get rid of records "...about the Clinton administration's response to reports of terrorist threats in 2000 as he was preparing to respond to questions from the commission..." He would have been better off facing the commission. He lost his law license and 50,000$.Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
Which bit everyone in the butt when he was impeached for something impeachable. From the time he was elected many would-be influencers never stopped talking about impeaching him. The same happened during the previous six or so presidencies. I remember people always talking about impeaching bush, clinton and bush. I remember hearing Rush Limbaugh during Clinton's first term saying the country was held hostage.Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.
Dang! I was so hoping that our Trump-trumpeter got at least something right. Some folks just cant get a break.I just looked it up. The washington post still has an article about him being fined in 2005.Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
I was not a "fake dossier" as it has been misrepresented continuously by the right.
Steele got intelligence about Trump from both Russian and Dutch sources, but he couldn't verify it and he stated as such. Obama was informed of this but chose not to go public with it, especially since the 2016 election was drawing near.
BTW, the RNC was financing it before they abandoned it after Trump got the nomination, so the DNC picked it up but they also couldn't verify it.
What did I get wrong?Dang! I was so hoping that our Trump-trumpeter got at least something right. Some folks just cant get a break.
Steele dossier - WikipediaWhat did I get wrong?
Thus, Berger was prosecuted. So, should Trump be exempt?On May 17, 2007, Berger relinquished his license to practice law as a result of the Justice Department investigation.
What did I get wrong?
No, I didn't say Trump should be exempt. Trump may not have wanted his document accidently stolen and destroyed by (D)'s going into the archives and accidently slipping them into ones socks.Thus, Berger was prosecuted. So, should Trump be exempt?
But we are talking about Trump not the character of Moses.Well, since you asked:
There is no upside to violating the Law of Holes.
- being a mouthpiece for a racist, misogynist, pathological liar, and
- emphasizing this to the detriment of your other charming qualities.